Post navigation

The New Victorians

The media practices a little Pauline Kael syndrome on the gun issue in this piece, which notes the shocking conclusion that “women” – meaning in this case “wealthy liberal women from the most liberal city in the United States” – don’t like guns much.

And in so doing, we mark the rise of a new breed of victorians:

Gun violence is the kind of issue, said Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, “that has real potential to mobilize waves of women voters and waves of office-holders.”

“What’s different here is Newtown. That cut a lot of different ways to a lot of different women.”

Perhaps.

Smart women – smart guys, too – realized that the only real defense against evil with guns is good people with guns.

Dumb women? And men…?

Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., a member of the Congressional Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, is eager to get Congress on the record on gun issues. She supports tighter restrictions.

“If we can force votes on these bills on the floor of the House and the Senate, where everybody has to be on record, it’s going to make it very clear to a huge segment of the population — that being women — of where people stand. And I think that will inform the decisions people make at the ballot box,” said Speier.

Yes, Ms. Speier, by all means get those votes on the record.

Because women are the fastest growing segment in the gun-owning population. Across racial, social, economic and political boundaries, women are buying guns and learning to shoot faster than men are (largely because guys are more likely to have already started).

And maybe in your ofay Bay Area district, a majority of women will snif and vote against the proles with the guns.

East of the Sierras?

The article does, however, cut to the heart of the anti-gun movement:

Behind the scenes, an influential network of female philanthropists based in San Francisco is working to make sure the issue remains prominent, particularly to women.

Shortly after the Newtown shooting, members of the 20-year-old San Francisco-based Women Donors Network began hearing from their 200 members, all of whom donate at least $25,000 a year to progressive causes and individuals and politicians.

Collectively, they contribute $150 million a year to various causes and politicians, the organization says.

And there’s your battle.

The Second Amendment movement is millions of Real Americans who turn out to rallies, testify at hearings, vote for Second Amendment candidates, and above all own guns without incident for their entire lives.

The Orcs? A few obscenely wealthy crones who write big checks to astroturf groups like “Protect Minnesota” and the “Violence Policy Center”.

Did I say “Astroturf?”

Among the women’s organizations at the forefront of the issue is Moms Rising, the 1.1 million-member activist organization co-founded by Berkeley resident Joan Blades.

“Moms Rising” is a reboot of the “Million Mom March”, the group with “1.1 million members” (no doubt anyone that visits the website is counted as a “member”) that can never muster more than three “members” for an event in the Twin Cities.

Gun violence touches every neighborhood, said Moms Rising executive director Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner. Twice in the past year, her children’s private schools in Seattle have been on lockdown because of the threat of a person nearby brandishing a gun.

“We had a national awakening with the (Newtown shooting),” Rowe-Finkbeiner said. “It is something that a lot of women — and men — could relate to.”

And I love the imagery; a bunch of upper-middle-class crones who can write $25,000 checks and whose kids are snuggled into private schools trying to set the agenda for women in Chicago, on ranches in Montana, in North Minneapolis – many of whom are just starting to realize that gun bans don’t save people; people do.

But seriously….I lived in Northern Wisconsin and NE Minnesota in the past. A lot of women own guns. Hunt, target shoot. And/or have boyfriends/husbands who are big 2nd amendment rights supporters. Lefty women from San Fran and Mpls think that all gals think alike. They make a bad assumption.

I find it interesting how the term “mom” has become more of a sacred status than indicative of a life situation. As a society, mothers stopped raising their children a couple decades ago. I know, that’s sexist but very few fathers are their child’s primary caregiver even when it’s presented as a viable option.

Moms who were gainfully employed farmed the chore out as soon as they were given permission by feminist doctrine which absolved them of any responsibility beyond the biological necessities and covering the kids’ cost. It was bolstered by “Reaganomics” which, according to some, made two incomes necessary just to survive. At least that’s how I remember the phenomenon evolving.

Forget about “dads”. They’ve been marginalized for ages. Some by choice, most by societal norm.

That’s why it’s interesting to read about these “moms” who now choose to utilize this status to enhance their credibility in another issue about which they know little. How many of them actually are responsible for hands-on, day-to-day raising of their children? Pre-schools (for six-month olds?), nannys (never got the distinction between them and babysitters), and other hired help with feel good titles don’t count.

I know that this issue cuts across most socio-economic boundries, and some have no choice. None the less, to me it is accurate. I think we just witnessed what happened when the first kennel-raised crop of kids reached voting age.

These women seeking to enhance their credibility because they’re mothers makes about as much sense as a child convicted of killing both parents seeking clemency for being an orphan.

I wonder how many women have been the purchasers of guns in the last couple of months. It wouldn’t surprise me if the number exceeded the MM membership. It would be fun if they started a group and called it MAM (Million Armed Moms).

I think its safe to say the explosion in firearms purchases includes women. Over the years it have found that a large number of women find the idea of shooting a gun intriguing.

While birds of a feather flock together, I still have been around less than conservative groups and had the same experience. They may not be willing to run out and join the NRA, but most seem willing to give it a try; take a walk on the wild side if nothing else. Of course this excludes the indoctrinated and those (of both genders) who have an inherent fear of guns. Like I do of motorcycles.

Maybe like nose picking, they do it (have some degree of interest) but would never acknowledge it publicly.